User talk:Saxifrage/Archive 6

The history of this archive begins at this diff and ends at this diff.

Category Spamming
Hey thanks for removing that North American Union cat from the pages it was recently added to. I was actually about to do it (had the Council on Foreign Relations in my watchlist) and you beat me to the punch!--Jersey Devil 22:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Requests for Feedback
Hello, Saxifrage. It's been some time since we created Requests for feedback. You'd be pleased to know that traffic is growing. However, I have plans to make it an integral Wikipedia process. I have started a discussion on the village pump, and I think you may be interested in it. Please read and reply there. Thanks. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Libertarianism
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. Paul Cyr 08:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the warning. I'm aware of the danger, but will take this as a cue to moderate my actions. &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 17:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

He won't listen to you. Block him!!! He will just revert that page again unless you block him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.194.4.185 (talk • contribs).


 * Hello /my non-linear troll/. I actually am listening to Paul. I don't listen to you. &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 20:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Irgendwer
Thanks for the heads up! I added it to the open CheckUser case that I have against him. I hope they work fast as he seems to be on a spree. If these are all him, we're looking at a permanent block here. --Woohookitty(meow) 09:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I blocked the account. Yep he's well aware of what he's doing. I've explained it to him a couple of times. --Woohookitty(meow) 01:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for the spam confirmation. Just a quicky to say quite a few of your biases look quite like mine feel! Tho I'm the other side of the pond. Take care -- Nigel 18:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * We always appreciate those who confirm our biases - and I'm sure I didn't say that first - I'm happy to confirm yours! In passing I'd not come across the term Sex-positive - it looks relevant and I will explore it more (it's not the only one I like but one I didn't know about).  Catch you around I'm sure - take care -- Nigel 12:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Irgendwer category
I took the liberty to add Irgendwer to the category, and to add the line that that category is for all suspected userids of that particular person. --Serge 23:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. I undid all that and just marked Irgendwer to be a suspected sockpuppet of Alfrem, though I did leave a comment in the category article. --Serge 23:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Lonympics
Someone has deleted every single link i have ever done. They did not even read my pages, and they call every page i have ever done as spam. I do not accept that. My pages provide useful information and some utter rat has just removed everyone of my pages why did they do that how can this be stopped. Thye must have spent hours doing it. Why did he get such satisfication delting every page i ever did. Why? This spam unit is not acceptable. They go after any small wwb master and try to destroy them but do noting about big webmaster. Every page idid had useful info by every opage was removed this is not fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newuser123 (talk • contribs)


 * Replied on your Talk page. &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 00:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Newuser123 is getting pretty nasty over there. Still watching, but I think he/she should probably be blocked for a while for vio of WP:NPA SB_Johnny  | talk 11:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - Lonympics
Thanks for dealing with Newuser123 whilst I was asleep. I got some pretty uncivil emails and comments from him too. Shame I never got a chance to talk to him before he was indefinitely blocked. --PTSE 14:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply: Alternative Wine Closures
Howdy! I appreciate your interest in the subject. The birth of the article came from wanting to include information about the Vino-Seal and Zork but then deciding that there really wasn't enough info to merit separate articles. My thoughts then went to a List but with only 4 main alternative wine closures, a straight bullet point list wouldn't be a compelling article. So I went with the entity of alternative wine closures as it's own subject matter--as it is being referred to in the wine world as part of the debate over Cork usage. The entries on there are straight pros/cons without really going into the history or development of the individual closures as their main articles would. The concept of "Alternative Wine Closures" is framed within the context of how it relates to Cork Taint. I choose to stick with that usage so as not stray into "Original Research". The individual articles could cover the pro/con aspect but this article brings it into a list format and ties it directly into how the term "Alternative Wine Closures" is used in the Cork debate. Again, I appreciate the interest and the help. It is a great idea to link to the main articles because that is where a reader would go to get into the more history/development side of those closures.Agne 05:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Pat8722 arbitration request
Please note that a request for arbitration has been made at Requests_for_arbitration. Your input would be most valuable. —BorgHunter (talk) 00:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
I've been keeping one eye on what's been going on with Pat8722, and I'm extremely impressed with the way you are handling it, so here is a barnstar to say thanks. --Kbdank71 17:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)



Visitor bureau links deleted
Those were SPAM!? I thought they were legit. MMGI added abunch more like them. Should I get rid of 'em?User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 21:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply and praise.User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 22:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
I put a request in to the Oversight mailing list to have those revisions hidden. Even if that is Andrew Morrow posting, that's not cool. Thanks for the heads up! --Woohookitty(meow) 05:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

re: andrew morrow phone number at Talk:Susan Polgar
User:Amorrow is a banned user and he posted his own phone number under an IP address. Removing it was reasonable but it's not a big deal. He's also been emailing me. Phr (talk) 06:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Regina
Neat - cheers -- Nigel (Talk) 17:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Article United States housing bubble
Saxifrage, thanks again for your help with the refs in this article. I've complete this task, and am really please with the results. I also agree with SlapAyoda that a featured article nomination would really improve the article's quality. I would appreciate your feedback or nomination if you believe that this is appropriate now. Frothy 13:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note that I've requested peerreview for this article at Peer_review/United_States_housing_bubble. Frothy 11:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * "Several positive comments have been made about the article "US housing bubble," both at its talk page and over the web (blogs, Google), and the discussion came about about nominating it as a featured article. Saxifrage suggested that it be peer reviewed as part of this process, so I've requested this here. Your comments and feedback would be greatly appreciated. Frothy 11:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)"

War zone / Warzone disambig
Looks good, thanks for the note. Edward 19:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam, woah
Check out the spam wikiproject's talk page. I think I just blew a big huge gaping craziness on the Untraveledroad.com linkspam inquery. Kevin_b_er 03:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh if it was not obvious
http://www.aetherometry.com/antiwikipedia2/awp2_index.html. The other is that also, somewhere, I forget right now. Go Google it or something and you will find it. And you are already talking about it here: Criticisms. They are Dr. Correa's ISBN, so they get listed. And the titles are censored out. I am cofortable with that censorship, for now. -- DocCory 01:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Pat8722
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Pat8722. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Pat8722/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Pat8722/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 02:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Regina images
Can you, then, please advise what must be done to save the images from deletion? Thanks. Masalai 02:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly you could communicate this to Friesguy, who is the person who raised the question of using these photos in the first place and communicated with the original photographer about using them in the Wikipedia article on Regina. Friesguy now appears to have become rather disgusted with the whole procedure, and to be unwilling to pursue it further; it seems a pity that the photos -- which the photographer is entirely willing should appear in the article -- should now be lost. Masalai 08:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Dhanks
He has blanked his talk page again. I'm not sure if he is required to have a link on his talk page to the archive you created. Big E 1977 20:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification
That makes sense, I'll refrain from adding links then to my site and projects. Thanks again. Sherman

Inline audio link pop-ups


As you're one of the people who commented about formatting/clutter on the audio template, I'm wondering what you think of my proposal for a javascript popup instead. I fixed the "clicking on the icon goes to the image page" problem a while ago, but there is still the "overloaded interface"/"too many click targets" problem, and I'm proposing we use javascript to hide the extra links until you hover over it. You can try out the mock-up yourself by adding this to your User:Saxifrage/monobook.js:

document.write('');

This would be a site-wide change, so everyone would see it, and it safely falls back to the current design with several links on browsers without javascript. I would be happy with any kind of support, suggestions, or criticism; right now I feel like I'm talking to a wall. — Omegatron 18:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and unusual thanks at that
Well, you've made me think (no mean feat I can tell you!). Have you thought about being some kind of life coach as you really pushed me into saying what I really thought. I guess the problem with wikipedia is the dichotomy of being non POV when altering articles and then being completely POV when it comes to AfD. I will admit to being curious as to why as you were pushing me towards presenting a much better description of my viewpoint which is opposite to yours. Or was this not your intention? Maybe at gone-midnight I'm reading more into things than I should! Mallanox 23:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Claude V. and Interweb Medley
I'm sorry for being a dick.

I had no vested interest in Interweb medley. As far as its subject matter I could really care less. I was defending the existence of the article on principal - and I think it is an important principal.

I realize that the article didn't "belong to" me - but I also realize that it was my work.

It burns me that there are people out there deleting non-harmful, accurate, existing articles. It makes no sense to me.

I can understand the deletion of vanity pages and commercial pages and pages about non-notable schools or garage bands - I really can.

But when an article answers a specific need - a need that I think I articulated - it seems so wasteful to delete it. The "cost" to the Wikipedia to maintain such an article is simply a few extra electrons. I daresay that the cost to nominate the article for deletion and maintain and archive the comments associated with the deletion was higher than the cost of maintaining that article ever could be.

Finally, I think that if there is a reasonable debate about whether to delete or keep, we should err on the side of keep.

You were very strident about deleting the article and that annoyed me a great deal. I also found it deliciously ironic that if the standards that you very clearly spelled out to justify the deletion of Interweb medley were applied to the Claude Vermette article - an article you have every reason to be proud of, btw - it would merit a delete! I thought that it was intellectually dishonest of you to fail to acknowledge that.

Regardless, I hate acting like a child and I apologize for doing so. From the look of your profile it would appear that we have a great deal in common above and beyond the fact that we both love the Wikipedia.

I hope you didn't lose any sleep over the deletion - I certainly did not - but I felt poorly about it nevertheless.

Keep editing! --AStanhope 00:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Juan Martin
I see you have come across the Juan Martin page. If you look at the history, you will notice that there is controversy surrounding Juan Martin's nationality. I, along with (I think) the rest of the human race, believe he is spanish as he purports to be. User UKBN2, however, thinks he comes from southern england, dyed his hair black and affects a spanish accent (see his previous modifications). Thinking this to be vandalism, I reverted his changes to the article, saying he needs serious references in order to state such an extraordinary claim. He now cites two sources, however one is a website that does not mention Juan Martin, and the other is an out-of-print (according to Amazon) book. I am unsure of what to do. Should I revert to the original version of the article (not written by me, I only came across it when a guitarist friend used this page as an example of wikipedia's mediocrity)? I would usually have presumed good faith on the part of UKBN2, however his previous versions of the article were so blatantly silly that I have difficulty believing anything he says. Any opinions? Yandman 07:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The leading expert on Flamenco has stated that Juan Martin isnt spanish. That the book is out of print is a strange point- the older it is the less verifiable it becomes? My points look ludicrous,yes, to an outsider. Please,why would i spend so much time on 1 issue?Ukbn2 20:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello again Sax. Could you prhaps help me with the picture problems i am having -shall i just say that i made the picture myself so it stays on the Juan Martin page? dunno what to do here!86.133.11.111 20:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Nagazi
You obviously dont get it, the point here was not to utilize wikipedia as a "free host" (a suggestion which I find ignorant and insulting), we are in no need of free hosts there are webhosts and websites in development at this point in time but that isnt the issue. The issue is your failure to understand that people have questions about the things they see...when they see a crowd of Guild members in and around a popular computer game they often wonder what exactly the name "Nagazi" means, I added a line or two to the Nagazi entry in wikipedia because...atleast in the western world the name is knowen more for the Guild rather then some obscure breed of dog, more importantly I do not want a person finding the entry on wikipedia and assuming our Guild is in any way related to that dog. Do you know perhaps understand what I was trying to do? I could of wrote 4 pages worth of introduction to the Guild, as a starter to defining and explaining it (taken directly from Guild documents) but instead I only had one or two lines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sissok Nagazi (talk • contribs) August 22, 2006


 * Replied on your talk page. &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 19:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit: Sorry, I wasn't too sure how to sign it. :\ was wondering about that...

Thanks
Thanks for the guidance about d e pohrens quote/citation,i will get the book, and cite the page number? Once again,thankyou.Ukbn2 19:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello again! Following the Juan Martin article,i have decided to refrain from editing until i have cast iron verifiable information. I already am aware of the information,but want to contribute in a responsible way without causing arguments. I have contacted a world reknowned Flamenco guitarist, several Flamenco historians and some contacts at a national broadcaster to help with the verification. When i have this cast iron information i will contact you to check it is ok to insert into the article. Is this the correct method? Many thanksUkbn2 20:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

HELP!!!!
Hi -i am editing the Juan Martin article with guitar technique information,and user addhoc is deleting all my writing. Please,what do i do about this?Ukbn2 13:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Saxifrage, for what's it worth, I agree that calling other Wikipedians liars doesn't help. Indicating they are possibly confused is certainly preferable. In this context, I would suggest that Ukbn2 is possibly very slightly confused as I haven't deleted his writing today, apart from minor copy edits. I have tagged some of it as requiring citations however. However, Ukbn2 has removed these tags. I'll reintroduce the references tag, you originally introduced. By the way, I have allowed 24 hours for references to be provided for the writing that was tagged, which I think is reasonable. Addhoc 15:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Responed at Talk:Juan Martín. &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 17:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello sax - i am again being what can only described as stalked by user addhoc on the juan martin page - his latest example for instance:- "Your comment that "zapateado is explained with the link" shows that you haven't grasped that all material has to be verifiable. In this case you are required to provide a reputable source that links "zapateado" to Juan Martín. Before making any further edits, I would suggest you read the most important procedures for this article, which are: WP:BLP, WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. Also you could have a look at WP:CITE and WP:RS. Thanks, Addhoc 14:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)"

The link explains that zapateado means "tap, or heel tapping" it is a sound most of hear when listening to flamenco, and is on most flamenco albums. It is also on Juan martins more recent albums [the earlier article mentions the fact that flamenco dancers are on the album,this is why i have enhanced the article with zapateado reference]. This is getting tiresome,is there anyway i can stop this guy trolling my edits,as this is getting ridiculous. Thanks Ukbn2 14:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT NOTICE HELP REQUEST
Hi there - I am Anita Wagner and I posted on my page a promotional piece for a conference I am organizing as the Director of Outreach for the Institute for 21st Century Relationships that has been removed for potential copyright infringement. You left me a message explaining why the material was remoed.

I am fully authorized as a co-founder of this non-profit organization and as a member of its staff and the conference staff to post the removed material, which I personally wrote.

How can I get it placed back on my page?

Thank you, Anita Wagner

US housing bubble for featured article?
Thanks again for making the effort to provide comments and feedback on the US housing bubble article. As summarized at the page Featured_article_candidates, I believe that all the objections and issues raised have been addressed. Would you please have a look and consider supporting this for "featured article" status? Especially given the (unfortunate) recent news (see, e.g., today's New York Times "most-emailed" Op-Ed "Housing Gets Ugly" here), this would be an especially timely featured article, and help "Wiki" live up to its speedy name. Frothy 02:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Potomac Senior High School
Hello im a little bit confused on this Stub class thing. Can you help me out on this. I feel that Potomac Senior High School does deserve a higher mark than stub class. Thanks John R G 05:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

&#x3C;ref&#x3E; bug? / Help!
Saxifrage -- do you know what could be wrong here with &#x3C;ref&#x3E;s: Talk:United_States_housing_bubble? Thanks, Frothy 21:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Question on Merger
Saxifrage, you have been helpful in the past and I now have another question for you. I would like to suggest a merger of two to three articles into a single one.

I was thinking of merging Brooke Brodack and Emmalina among others into a single article perhaps named "Famous YouTube Celebrities". ADF's have failed for those pages because people believe they are notable, however there really isnt' a reason to keep them seperate as neither have really enough information to warrent individual pages. There are many other 'famous' users that have been talked about that do not have a page dedicated to them yet.

Now I have seen and read the guidelines but there isn't really an way proposed on how to merge exisiting articles into a single article that has not been created yet. Suggestions? --Bschott 17:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Excessive editing by Saxifrage
Hello Saxifrage. Firstly I am a new user/editor at this site so if this is the wrong place to comment then let me know where is the right place and I will do it there instead. I also noted you have no contact email address for us to email you which is unfortunate as I have spent about an hour plus trying to work out how to reach you regarding the message you left in my personal mailbox.

You have now removed all of my entries on two occasions stating that the use of copyright material from another site is not allowed (I am the original author of that discussion material on another web site). I then checked the guidelines at this site as you suggested and noted that if using copyrighted material but the original author of that material then I should state that when entering the material here to stop others removing it. I did this for the second time whilst also rewriting the majority of the entry and cutting it right back and yet you removed it again. I have reread the rules again and can not see the additional requirement stated that you suggest re making the original material on the other site also open for use from original source. I do understand your argument but just can not easily find that guideline at this site despite looking several times under the copyright link or links you indicated. If it is there it needs to be better presented under the copyright link I clicked in my view.

I am now going to write a complete fresh entry from scratch to avoid you doing this again so there can be no doubt re copyright and its use. I should add that I have a doctorate specialising in the areas of corporate identity and branding so I am formally qualified to write under that heading I feel.

My next point is about the link to our web site that I had also entered. You removed this twice as well, from a seperate link area on the page amongst other such links. The first time you stated that it was due to the link being to a fee paying web site. The web site is a free membership non commercial web site ran by myself and a number of other experts within corporate identity and marketing. You will also see that stated under the about us section as well as free membership link from front page being clearly stated. It has been running for nearly 10 years and was the first of its kind on the net for these areas created before the other web site links that already exist on that page. It is there to aid others interested in the area. On the second post I even put in brackets next to the link entry that it was a free membership resource to stop you removing it for and you still removed it a second time. Please explain yourself in this second regard as I feel it is a unjustified action. As a newbie here I am finding your editorial approach a bit too harsh especially the removal/revert without an initial discussion. I look forward to your response here or in my message box. My username is shauny000. Finally as I am a new user, can you tell me where I should take my complaint at this site if we are unable to reach an agreement on your current or future editorial actions ? Many thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shauny000 (talk • contribs) Septeber 1, 2006.

Wikipedia articles with nonstandard pronunciation
Do you have any idea why your user page appears as a page that requires something converted to IPA? I can see that you have the category link there, but am not sure how to fix it so that people don't come here with their phonetic pencils sharpened!!!

--Slp1 00:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for catching that! (Replied on your Talk page.) &mdash; Saxifrage ✎ 18:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for figuring it out. I've learnt something too from your explanation of how the link was wrong. Thanks!!! --Slp1 03:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for your comment offering to join at Talk:Design_research. The situation isn't as cut-and-dry as I'd like, and I'd rather not make a sockpuppet accusation if it's not necessary. --Ronz 22:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

LED stuff
Hard to express this - the quality and tone of your posts to the user on this is quite remarkable. Most of us could learn something from both what you have said and the way you said it. It's good to have you around - nuff said! Nigel (Talk) 06:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Aleximpure
I notice you picked this one up. It may well have been via my talk page given the time of the edit but if not User talk:Lozleader as well as the one on my talk page from that user will give you background. Whatever else 2 rather "unusual" users (the one you reverted as well as the one who placed it) - both on my watch list (I should have cleared that one but other stuff happened and I overlooked it). Patience - that is one I need to learn. Hope life is good --Nigel (Talk) 06:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Me again!
Advice if you don't mind as you are considerably more experienced than me. I listed an article for deletion at the beginning of the week (and I haven't done that many). I found it as a result of external links (from your example I am going to try and stop using the other word!) & links search. It had been prod'ed by an editor who appears to have gone on a wiki break at that time and it got removed and no one noticed. No one has voted and I know enlisting voters is not correct.

So what could I do/have done and what happens next? It really is part of the learning curve and I would appreciate the views of an objective observer (it is not a vote I'm after and I'm not posting this anywhere else - tho I did wonder about WP:WPSPAM) - hope you don't mind and thanks --Nigel (Talk) 15:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)